Sender: Rare Books and Special Collections Forum <EXLIBRIS@RUTVM1.BITNET>
While it is not a *normal* part of my character to explain myself, I did
take the time this morning to apologize, and now, due to the number of
private messages from friends in the trade who have suggested, ever so
nicely, that I may have been just the slightest bit over the edge in my
response to what I perceived to be an overweening display of elitism, in
response to a genuine call for help, I will post the following redaction
from a treatment report; the astute may draw what ever lesson their
experience permits.
_Horae Beatae Mariae Virginis_ "Documentation of this manuscript book
exemplefies the difficulties encountered by a castaloguer in attempting to
accurately describe a bound text. The cataloguer's collation was:
A6; b-D12; E6; F-H12; I-K8; L8(-1).
When the book was disbound it became clear that the actual collation was
A8;B6; C-F8; G2; H4; I8; J-K6; L-M8; N8(-1); O6; P6(-1).
There is more, but it should be clear that this vomume (Roman Usage,
Central France, ca. 1475) was not accurately described by the librarian
in whose care the accurate description of this volume was entrusted.
This is only one example. I nearly a quarter century of working on 12th-
18th c. volumes, I have yet to pull a mss volume which has been correctly
described by a librarian. It is that one single fact, more than any other
facet of librarianship which arouses my ire; and the recent postings by
some librarians simply pushed me over the edge.
Scholarship is very important to me; sloppy scholarship (and I doubt that
there is one among the readers of this list who cannot point to an example)
is anathema, because it calls the trade into disrepute.
...but I feel much better now.
Jack <76520.3531@compuserve.com>